英语本科毕业设计论文从语用学角度看英语会话中幽默的产生

《英语本科毕业设计论文从语用学角度看英语会话中幽默的产生》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《英语本科毕业设计论文从语用学角度看英语会话中幽默的产生（20页珍藏版）》请在装配图网上搜索。

1、三 江 学 院本科生毕业设计（论文）题 目 从语用学角度看英语会话中幽默的产生 英语 系 英语 专业学生姓名 学号 B07011010 指导教师 职称 讲师 起讫日期 2010.12-2011.5 设计地点 第二教学楼 AcknowledgementsThis thesis concludes my English learning of over one decade. I would like to thank all my previous teachers, especially those in Sanjiang University who taught me Intensive

2、Reading, to who I owe much of my knowledge in English language, translation, literature, and especially, in linguistics. My heartfelt gratitude goes to my adviser, Ms Lee, whose enlightening instruction, invaluable suggestion and patient encouragement have helped greatly to shape this thesis. Thanks

3、 are also extended to my boss Xun Jinbiao as well as my colleaguesit is with their support that the time was guaranteed for me to pursue my studies from which this thesis benefits a lot. AbstractHumor, an act of utterance, plays a significant role in daily lifeit can amuse addressee, adjust atmosphe

4、re, and improve interpersonal relationship with presenting speakers intelligence and charm. As a phenomenon of language, humor draws a lot of attention in the field of linguistics.The production of humor does not exist independently because there is close relationship between itself and rules of lan

5、guage. Hence, this paper analyzes the production of humor from two important theories in pragmatics, the Cooperative Principle and Presupposition. And it finally gets a summary that many humorous effects is generated by violating the four maxims of the Cooperative Principle (Relation, Quantity, Qual

6、ity and Manner) and the three characters of Presupposition (Mutual knowledge, Appropriateness and Defeasibility) through analyzing a series of humorous conversations. All in all, it is exactly an effective way to analyze humor from the Cooperative Principle and Presupposition, and they two really ha

7、ve made great contributions to analyzing the existence of humor. Practically, with these two theories, people can avoid many embarrassing situations by creating humor.Keywords: humor; pragmatics; the Cooperative Principle; presupposition摘 要幽默是一种说话艺术，它在人们日常会话中起着不可或缺的作用在愉悦他人的同时，还能调节气氛，改善人际关系，并且从侧面体现着说

8、话者的睿智与人格魅力。它作为一种语言现象，赢得了语言学界的广泛关注。幽默的产生离不开语言本身的规律。本文从语用学中的合作原则和语用预设方面详细分析了幽默的产生。通过对一系列幽默会话的分析，得出了通过违反合作原则四准则（量的准则，质的准则，相关准则，方式准则）及预设的三个特性（合适性，共知性，可撤销性）中的任何一个都可能产生幽默的效果。总之，本文分析得出，语用学中两个重要理论对英语会话中的幽默所进行的一系列分析是一套行之有效的方法，它增进了会话者之间的关系，避免了许多尴尬的出现，并且在实际生活和学习中也是起着举足轻重的作用。关键词：幽默；语用学：合作原则；语用预设Table of Content

9、s1Introduction12The Cooperative Principle and Humor12.1The Violation of the Maxim of Relation and Humor22.1.1The Maxim of Relation22.1.2The Violation of Relation and Humor22.2The Violation of the Maxim of Quantity and Humor42.2.1The Maxim of Quantity42.2.2The Violation of Quantity and Humor42.3The V

10、iolation of the Maxim of Quality and Humor52.3.1The Maxim of Quality52.3.2The Violation of Quality and Humor62.4The Violation of the Maxim of Manner and Humor72.4.1The Maxim of Manner72.4.2The Violation of Manner and Humor83Presupposition and Humor93.1The Violation of the Maxim of Mutual Knowledge a

11、nd Humor93.1.1The maxim of Mutual Knowledge93.1.2The Violation of Mutual Knowledge and Humor103.2The Violation of the Maxim of Appropriateness and Humor113.2.1The Maxim of Appropriateness113.2.2The Violation of Appropriateness and Humor113.3The Defeasibility and Humor123.3.1The Maxim of Defeasibilit

12、y123.3.2The Violation of Defeasibility and Humor134Conclusion14References15IV三江学院2011届本科生毕业论文Pragmatic Analysis on English Conversational Humor1 IntroductionHumor plays a role of amusing ones mood, improving interpersonal relationship and conditioning atmosphere in daily life. It can also make the c

13、onversation vivid and unforgettable, thus embodies speakers intelligence and personal charm. Consequently, humorous language, as a language phenomenon, has drawn much attention of many language scholars. Generally speaking, pragmatics is defined as the study of how speakers of a language use sentenc

14、es to effect successful communication. It studies how human beings interpret language and use it through contexts in communication. There is a close relationship between humor and Pragmatics and sometimes people create humor by accident or on purpose by violating Pragmatics. As humorous language hav

15、e many distinctive pragmatic features, meanwhile, the Cooperative Principle and Presupposition are two important branches in pragmatics, the cause of humor can be explained through each principle and their functions from pragmatic perspective. 2 The Cooperative Principle and HumorIn daily life, conv

16、ersation is of great importance because it contains speakers information and through which speakers can transmit their messages. Paul Grice，American philosopher and logician，believes that, during the conversation, speakers and hearers exchange their own ideas by developing their dialogues. That is t

17、o say, to reach satisfactory interaction, they must obey certain rules or regulations, in other words, the two sides must cooperate with each other. That is which later Grice called the Cooperative Principle: “Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs

18、, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged.” The Cooperative Principle has four sub-principles: the maxim of Relation, Quantity, Quality and Manner.In daily life，human beings do not always observe the Cooperative Principle strictly. Grice said, “Only when th

19、ey (the four maxims) are “flouted”, does conversation implicature occur” (1975). So in order to create humorous language, the speaker sometimes may violate the Cooperative Principle maxims on purpose. Meanwhile, the information addressee can not get the information as he /she expects, and then the a

20、ddressee may be puzzled by the speakers words. Thus, the speaker may enlighten hearers guesswork about hearers motivation. In this way, humor is created. Often, humorous conversation is generated by violating maxims of the Cooperative Principle. 2.1 The Violation of the Maxim of Relation and Humor2.

21、1.1 The Maxim of RelationGrice gave such an analogue to explain the real meaning of Relation:“I expect a partners contribution to be appropriate to the immediate needs at each stage of the transaction. If I am mixing ingredients for a cake, I do not expect to be handed a good book or even an oven cl

22、oth (though this might be an appropriate contribution at a later stage).”Grice means that, whatever you say is supposed to be relevant to the main topic, so that the two sides of conversation can talk on around the same subject. In other words, the messages provided by the speaker should be pertinen

23、t and related. Sometimes in order to generate conversational implicature, which is of the essence in humor, people may violate Relation, so jokes are created. 2.1.2 The Violation of Relation and Humor There are many phenomena which violate Relation and create humor in daily life. For example：Jacks b

24、est friend and Jack broke a window while playing baseball and no one saw it except his younger brother. They went over and offered him a piece of candy to let him not tell. He refused it. “Ill give you my baseball,” Jack said.“No!”“Well, what do you want?”“I want to tell.” This joke occurs after Jac

25、k got into trouble. To bribe him, Jack asked what he need by saying “what do you want?” He implied that if the litter brother could keep the secret, Jack would give some kind of reward in return. The only witness - his younger brother, however, did not want to keep this secret, and what the little b

26、rother spoke is absolutely running counter to Jacks intention. So the younger brother responded “I want to tell” whose implicature is “I do not need anything in return and I just want to tell the secret.” What he said is totally irrelevant to bribery. Thus, humorous effect is produced.Here is anothe

27、r example: Tom: Last week a grain of sand got into my wifes eye and she had to see a doctor. It cost me three dollars.John: Last week a fur coat went into my wifes eye and it cost me three hundred dollars. This is a conversation between two men. The first man wanted to express simple information tha

28、t his wife went to the hospital. At the same time, the second man used a similar device to deliver his complain about his own wife. He said that his wife had bought an expensive fur coat. Here readers can clearly see that there is no obvious connection between the two topics. That is, it goes agains

29、t the maxim of Relation. However, once the second mans words bursts out his mouth, the audiences can not help themselves laughing.2.2 The Violation of the Maxim of Quantity and Humor2.2.1 The Maxim of Quantity “If you are assisting me to mend a car, I expect your contribution to be neither more nor

30、less than is required. If, for example, at a particular stage I need four screws, I expect you to hand me four, rather than two or six (Grace, 1975)”. The above paragraph describes the maxim of quantity distinctly. Graces statement means that while talking with others, ones contribution should be ad

31、equately informative as required, but never too informative. Too much information is also uncooperative. Hearers will have the idea of thinking there is some other appointed information in speakers words. So it will obstruct addressees comprehension and weaken his/her understandings. Sometimes it ma

32、y even raise side issues. On the other hand, if the speaker violates Quantity intentionally, often humorous atmosphere is set.2.2.2 The Violation of Quantity and HumorHere is an example:Patient: Doctor, please tell me the truth. What are my chances to recover?Doctor: Just a hundred percent! Statisti

33、cs show that only nine out of ten die from the disease! Now nine of my patients have already died from it, you are the tenth!In the scene of the above example, the patient and the doctor were talking about patients condition. The doctor did not give enough information at first, which made the patien

34、t be prospect of his recovery. But when the doctor told the whole information, it turned out to be a mess.Here is another example：“Flowers need water,” said the teacher. “Water your flowers every day, or they will die.”One morning Mother saw Marry out in the garden and asked, “What are you doing the

35、re, Mary?”“Watering flowers,” said Mary. “But it is raining now!”“Oh, it does not matter, Mum. I have an umbrella!” This is an example of the violation of quantity too. The faithful girl just did as what the teacher saidto water flowers every day (even in rainy days). Here every reader with common s

36、ense understands what her mother intended to expressflowers neednt water in rainy days. But the little girl did not catch her mothers meaning. She thought her mother was just caring about her health. So she answered: “Oh, it does not matter, Mum. I have an umbrella!” The readers are amused and humor

37、 is generated because of deficiency of information. That is, her mother did not tell her flowers neednt water in rainy the days.To sum up, conclusions can be made that successful speakers should have the ability to realize how much information can be absorbed by addressee in the conversation.2.3 The

38、 Violation of the Maxim of Quality and Humor2.3.1 The Maxim of QualityGrice explained the maxim of Quality like this: “I expect your contributions to be genuine and not spurious. If I need sugar as an ingredient in the cake you are assisting me to make, I do not expect you to hand me salt; if I need

39、 a spoon, I do not expect a trick spoon made of rubber.” He pointed out that while having a talk with others, one should keep his/her information true and logic. The definition is as follows:QualityTry to make your contribution exactly true, that is:(i). Do not say what you believe to be false;(ii).

40、 Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.2.3.2 The Violation of Quality and HumorQuality is said to be the most primary principle in the Cooperative Principle. On normal condition, no one will tell what himself/herself believes to be false. Just because this reason, humor is created by

41、accident. For instance: One cold day, a friend of the Browns went to visit them. The maid stopped him at the door. The friend asked, “Is Mr. Brown at home?” “No, he has gone out.” Replied the maid. “Is Mrs. Brown at home, then?” “No, she has gone out.” “May I come in and sit by the stove?” “No, it h

42、as gone out, too.”The above conversation happens between the maid and the visitor. What the maid said is clearly against logicstove can not walk, but she said it was out. The implicature is “I wont let you in.” Or may be, her master did not want to meet any friends. But it is not corresponding to “D

43、o not say what you believe to be false”. Once the maid said the last sentence, she might be embarrassed for she violated the common sense. There is no doubt that it leads to humorous effect.Here is another example which violates both two principles of Quality:An Irishman was once serving in a regime

44、nt in India. He did not like the climate there and decided to think out a trick by which he could get home. He went to the doctor and said to him, “My eyesight is very bad. Can you help me?”The doctor looked at him for a while and then asked, “Well, but how can you prove to me that your eyesight is

45、bad?”The Irishman looked around the room and at last said, “Well, doctor, can you see that nail on the wall?”“Yes.” Replied the doctor.“Well then,” said the Irishman, “and I cant.”This example violates both two principles of Quality. What the Irishman said was illogical and lacked sufficient evidenc

46、e to prove that his eyesight was poor. His real intention was to leave India so he pretended to be bad-sighted. However, his action did not coincide with what he saidhe had the ability to see the nail on the wall clearly, which showed that his eyesight was not poor. But in his later words he refused

47、 to admit this fact, which was believed to be ultimately fake. In other words, he said what himself believed to be false, and neither could he give adequate evidence to convince hearers to believe that his eyes did not operate well. Under such circumstance, he brought about humorous effects.2.4 The

48、Violation of the Maxim of Manner and Humor2.4.1 The Maxim of MannerGrace explained the maxim of Manner as: “I expect a partner to make it clear what contribution he is making to executed his performance with reasonable dispatch”(2002) That is, while talking with others, one is supposed to give prope

49、r information make his/her utterance clear, concise and easy to understand without ambiguous meaning. Hence, the definition of Manner includes the following sub-maxims:Be perspicuous.(i). Avoid obscurity of expression;(ii). Avoid ambiguity;(iii). Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity);(iv). Be order

50、ly.Once each of these principles of Manner is violated, conversations will be more humorous.2.4.2 The Violation of Manner and HumorThe violation of “avoid ambiguity”, “be brief” and “be clearly” can be found in creating humor here and there in everyday life. For instance:Jack: “Tom, how was the hors

51、e-riding yesterday?”Tom: “Not so bad. But my horse was too polite.”Jack: “Too polite?”Tom: “Yes. When we came to a fence, he let me go first.”This humor generally violates the first sub-maxim of Manner-avoid obscurity of expression. To lead to humorous results, Tom said “the horse was too polite” an

52、d “when we came to a fence, he let me go first” instead of “it got me down from the back of horse”. Here Tom did not tell the truth directly and clearly at first, only saying it was polite. His utterance was not perspicuous enough. This way of expressing an embarrassing thing can make hearer take an

53、 easy look at yesterdays horse-riding. Here is another example：Boss: “Go to my office and get this weeks pay. You are fired.”Worker: “But why? I have not done anything.”Boss: “Thats why you are fired.”In the above example, the worker is puzzled why he was fired by saying: “I have not done anything”.

54、 The presupposition of his utterance is he did not do anything bad. But the bosss presupposition is that he has no contribution to the company. Here the boss takes advantage of the ambiguity of the sentence “I have not done anything”. This humor violates the sub-maxim “avoid ambiguity” of Manner.3 P

55、resupposition and HumorPresupposition is firstly mentioned by German philosopher and logician, Gottlob Frege. He raised many theories of this issue, which later became core of presupposition. He said: “If anything is asserted there is always an obvious presupposition that the simple or compound prop

56、er names used have a reference. If one therefore asserts Kepler died in misery, there is a presupposition that the name Kepler designatessomething”. (1952)Here Frege means that there must be a man called Kepler, if one says “Kepler died in misery”. In other words, the presupposition of the sentence

57、“Kepler died in misery” is that there must be a man named Kepler. And no matter this sentence is true or false, the presupposition is true.The website Wikipedia defines presupposition as: presupposition is an implicit assumption about the world or background belief relating to an utterance whose tru

58、th is taken for granted in discourse. This definition is almost similar with what Frege means.Presupposition has three features, mutual knowledge, appropriateness of felicity, and defeasibility. Humorous effect may be created by violating each features of Presupposition.3.1 The Violation of the Maxi

59、m of Mutual Knowledge and Humor 3.1.1 The maxim of Mutual KnowledgePresupposition controls a certain implicature that requires knowledge which is admitted or known by the two sides of conversation. It is generally defined as an established truth of the common ground within which context plays its pa

60、rt in a concrete, changeable situation. Presupposition requires a collective approval which is maintained among all parties of a conversation. In addition, the existence of Mutual Knowledge leads to the effectiveness of communication and it helps to transmit information successfully. 3.1.2 The Viola

61、tion of Mutual Knowledge and Humor Sometimes, people may violate mutual knowledge by accident. In this way, the speaker is trying to say one thing while the addressee is talking about another. For example: John invited Jack to come to the party, Jack said if he did not go to date with his girlfriend

62、 he would come then. (Night) John called Jack: “what are you doing?”Jack: “Im driving now.”John: “OK, hurry up! We are all waiting for you!”Jack: “No, I mean Im heading for my girlfriends home!”The above conversation between two friends was talking about two different things separately. One was aski

63、ng his friends come to the party as soon as possible by saying “what are you doing”(he might forget his friend has to go to girlfriends home); the other meant that he was driving on the way to his girlfriends home. They two did not get the same general condition or background. Here the two speakers

64、information is transmitted inefficiently and sets certain obscure between the speaker and the addressee. The existence of disharmonious phenomenon brings about humorous effect.Often childrens innocence words may violate the Mutual Knowledge, though they are not intended to create humor. Here is an example: A little boy went to the dentist as he had a terrible toothache; the dentist checked his teeth and decided to pull the bad tooth out. When the operation was over, the boy asked